76: Apply Systemology with David Jenyns

15
Nov

David Jenyns is the founder of Systemology and the author of the best-selling book with the same title, where he helps business owners systemize their businesses. We talk about the Systemology framework, the benefits of consistently updating your business systems, and the difference between a scalable and a sellable system.

—

Listen to the podcast here

 

Apply Systemology with David Jenyns

Our guest is David Jenyns the founder of Systemology and the author of a best-selling book with the same title. He also founded and runs, I don’t know if he still runs it. It may have already been systemized, but he formally is the CEO of the Melbourne SEO Services company, a digital marketing agency. So welcome to the show, David.

Oh, it’s a pleasure to be here. Thank you for the kind introduction. And yes, I ended up stepping out of the digital agency. We had a lady who ran it and she ended up, it’s actually the final chapter in the book, she ends up moving back to the US for some family reasons, and we ultimately sold that company. And now my focus is exclusively on systemology.

Ok, so I missed that. I don’t know what happened. Maybe my lawnmower was a little bit too loud when I go to Pittsburgh, but I missed it. But anyway, I can’t wait to get into this stuff. And so let’s start at the beginning. How did you become an entrepreneur and build a digital agency? And then how do you transition to become an author and kind of creating a business about creating and improving businesses?

Yes. Well, I feel like I’ve always been an entrepreneur. I think right from when I left school, I started different projects, everything from importing product from the US. I helped to create a stock market education training program. I was involved in a rock and roll clothing music store. And the digital agency is probably what I was most well known for. I got stuck in that business for probably about 10 years too long, I think, when I look back on it. And for a lot of the same reasons that a lot of business owners get trapped in their business.

I just thought that the business was dependent on me and I thought our business was too creative and my team wouldn’t follow systems. And then I kind of had a little bit of that moment when I found out we were pregnant and I just saw my future flash before me. I kind of felt like, oh, I could, if I’m not careful, I’m going to be that dad who’s always too busy, who’s working 70-hour weeks, doing the mornings, late nights, weekends. And I thought, no, this is not what I want to do. And that really was a big U-turn and really kind of spore. That was kind of like where the seed of systemology came from. There’s like a few steps in between there, but that’s what it grew from for sure.

Well, it certainly doesn’t sound like you’re that kind of person who is stuck in his business with you having this conversation. 6 p.m. here on the East Coast of the U.S. You’re in Australia, which is like 9 a.m. in the morning, and you already been surfing this morning. So that doesn’t sound like a workaholic just kind of waking up under his desk and climbing out of his sleeping bag. So let’s talk a little bit about this whole journey, which led to Systemology. And this podcast is all about management blueprints, I call them, and Systemology definitely qualifies as a management blueprint in my vocabulary. So before Systemology, as you were building your digital agency and the previous businesses, was there a management blueprint that kind of inspired you that you kind of adopted partially or fully in building your businesses?

The main one, and I’ve still dipped back into it today, take a lot of ideas from it, and I feel like Systemology fits very well, hand in glove, is the traction framework by Gino Wichmann. I’ve always found he was able to take a lot of what I felt was Vern Harnish’s work, which felt like, you know, there was just a lot of different tools all thrown into one place. And Gino was able to effectively translate that into a system. And I found that very helpful. It kind of touches on, it’s a great, you know, business operating system. It doesn’t go very deep on any particular subject, but it’s wide enough that it sits right over the top. So no doubt you’re a big lover of Gino’s work too, I know.

I love Gino’s work. I also love Vern’s work. I like Michael Gerber a lot, Jack Stack and others. And this book is all about finding all those building blocks. And in my book, I talk about 10 different managing blueprints. But since I finished this book, I’ve come across 50 others. And I’m really fascinated about all these systems and they all are in different stages of completeness and branding and all that stuff. But I’m still building out the puzzle pieces. So Geno’s traction is the one that inspired you. And, I mean, tell me about a couple of tools that you used from EOS that particularly were helpful in building your digital agency.

A lot of it started off with this idea of thinking about the meeting cadence and thinking, like, when I think about particularly traction and I’m applying it to, like, the management team or the leadership team and we’re thinking about, you know, when we’re running our weekly meetings and our monthly meetings, our quarterly and our annual meetings and we’ve developed some itineraries that get covered in those meetings. And then I kind of started to expand beyond that and then really started to think about how the different departments can follow a similar structure and how that fits together.

And now we find we just we have a cadence in each of the different departments and set things that we cover and talk about. And it’s, you know, I think about identifying the department heads and building the team underneath those. And another big one that was from Gino is that whole idea of the visionary plus your integrator. I mean, he talks a lot about that in Rocket Fuel. I mean, that’s not a new idea. Michael Gerber, he talked about it as the leader and the manager. It’s one that’s been around for a while, but Gino wrote a whole book on just that topic.

Cadence is key when thinking about the structure and flow of meetings, from weekly to annual sessions, enabling departments to follow a similar rhythm. Click To Tweet

So that was really helpful and an important piece for systemology because a lot of business owners and founders, they are the visionary big picture people and they think, oh, I’m not a systems person, therefore I can’t have a systems driven business because they don’t see themselves as following process or they’re worried that it’ll stifle creativity. And a lot of the work that I do these days is helping them to understand that you don’t have to be the person creating the systems. You don’t have to see yourself as a systems person, as long as you understand how important they are and they’re the building blocks of business. And then finding the yin to your yang is a very important piece to making this work.

It’s a counterintuitive step for many entrepreneurs because everything is in their head. And why should they bother about the system thing when it’s unnecessary? People should just know it like they know it.

Yes.

But obviously that’s not automatic. And if you have a good operations manager, integrator, they can take charge of this systemizing project. So let’s talk about what triggered this whole idea to come up with this blueprint, the systemology blueprint. What was the… How did this come about?

Well, I had the previous businesses, I had one or two businesses prior to the digital agency that we actually fully systemized and sold, like the rock and roll clothing music store, which we modeled on Hot Topic out of the US, and we were trying to bring the Australian version of that here. And we went through the franchising route, we created documents for the store, we actually sold our first franchise. So I was really familiar with the idea of systems and processes.

But then when I got into the digital agency, all of this baggage just appeared where I, for some reason, thought that this business was different, Google’s always changing their algorithms, how can I systemize something if it’s just gonna get out of date very quickly? And there was so many intricate pieces to it that I’d need to create hundreds and hundreds of systems. That’s kind of what locked me up and I thought in hindsight, it was only with the perspective after we found out we were pregnant and I heavily just focused on systemizing and removed myself, I then realized this is such a common problem and it’s one of the hardest bridges to cross for many founders that start a business and then to grow it beyond them and to remove that key person dependency.

And then I thought, ooh, this is a problem worthy of me putting some attention on because I knew that it lives in the blind spot for a lot of founders. And the reason not a lot of great work has been done in this space is because rarely does it capture the attention of a visionary founder. You don’t find that many visionary founders that love systems and processes or get it, let alone then take the next step to formalize it and then teach it. So then I thought, wow, I can see an opportunity here. And even reading Michael Gerber’s work, Gino’s Built to Sell, Work to Systemize, built to sell, work to systemize.

There’s a bunch of books out there, but for me, none of them, they all built the case for why, but they didn’t really give me a proper framework of how to, and that was, I thought, ooh, I’m passionate about it. So I really deeply care for business owners. I know, like for me, they’re like the superheroes. They work tirelessly. They, you’ve got to grind it out. You’ve got to be a special kind of crazy to become a business owner and launch something from scratch. And I felt this is something that I could get behind and help support them and help them to solve just this one puzzle piece and do it better than anyone else.

You've got to be a special kind of crazy to become a business owner and launch something from scratch. Click To Tweet

No, I definitely, I think you did that. So let’s take an example. So let’s say a digital agency, let’s say it’s a 25 person digital agency and I’m the business owner and I’ve had it with the chaos that you know everyone is just running around and I have to be involved in all the projects I want to systemize it. How do I go about it? What does this project look like? How long does it take? How long does it take to document and then to teach people? Just give me a lay of the land here.

I think you’re probably looking at 12 to 18 months, I think, to actually change the culture of that sized organisation. You’ll get wins much before that, like probably within three months you’ll be able to identify your critical systems, document those, help to skill up some team members. Some team members will be in, some team members won’t quite follow the process. But then once you move beyond that, then you have to think about the other departments as well. So it’s almost like you need a minimum viable set of systems across the business. And then we have to, once we’ve captured it, all of the resistance happens up front, particularly at a 25-person team. Like you’re at that size, you’ve got people that are stuck in their ways.

They’ve probably been with you for a good amount of time. Some of them will be resistant to change. So it’s dealing and navigating through that that’s the challenge. And then it also, there’s a few other factors. It’s like, can you identify a systems champion? Someone who carries the flag and really drives this forward, then you might be able to do it quicker. And if you’re smaller than 25, you’ll probably do it in less than 12 months. So part of it will depend on the size of the team, the complexity, the product lines and things like that. So it’s, yeah, there’s no one exact answer, but I kind of like to err on longer, just so, you know, I prefer to, you know, under promise and over deliver. That’s my preference.

You want to manage expectations. You don’t want people to lose momentum, to feel like they’re behind the curve and abandon it. In terms of the number of systems, so Gino talks about this, he says a handful of processes, he says, and then US says 6-12, 6-10 processes, HR, HR marketing, sales, accounting, operations, processes, customer satisfaction. So how do you think about this? Is this a limited number or could this be as many as you want? Is it like a system is an HR, which includes everything from recruiting, performance management, payroll, or you have smaller processes within HR? What is your thinking about this?

It’s definitely the first question, most common question I get is where do I start? So the whole idea of systemology in stage one or step number one is to limit and narrow the focus. Like it’s the 80-20, what is the 20% of the systems in the business that deliver the 80% of the results? And we start there. So we think about a lot of problems in business can be solved with money and cash flow. So we focus on first, how do we make sure that the business can develop revenue or grow their revenue without key person dependency? So that’s the exercise we start off with. How do we capture people’s attention? How do we convert that prospect into a client? How do we onboard them, deliver the core product or service and get them to come back.

Systemology's primary step is to identify the vital 20% of systems that generate 80% of business results. Click To Tweet

We just start there, but then yeah, beyond that, then you need to move into the different departments and you need to apply the 80-20 in different departments. Oftentimes, depending on the type of business, after we move through that critical client flow, we’ll probably move into either finance or HR, depending on the problems that the business is having. Finance, if it’s cash flow, and then HR, if they’re looking to grow or they’re having team member issues, those sorts of things. And we think about recruitment, onboarding and some management, and there’s a handful of systems in each one of those. But this is not a one and done scenario.

Systemology and really just systems thinking is a cultural shift in the organisation. It’s a way of thinking that’s led by the leader and then implemented and enforced by the operations manager. And we need all of the department heads on board, and it becomes a way of doing things. So over time, you will be developing and improving and adding new systems. Part of the reason why people get stuck with this idea of systemization is when we say we think of a systemized business, they think of Amazon, Google and McDonald’s and all of these businesses that are very well established have been building systems for years and they think, ah, that’s the benchmark for where I need to start, yet we need to go back in time and think how did they actually get started.

So it’s this will evolve and those systems and number of systems will grow and that’s also part of the challenge as well. We need to think about the complexity of those systems and not introducing red tape and not undermining our intelligence of hiring smart team members. You’re not hiring people to come in and flip a burger with zero experience. So, you don’t need to systemize like McDonald’s has. You’re going to hire intelligent people that have trained and have a background ready to do a task. So we need to think about giving them more frameworks and checklists and rules of thumb to create consistent outcomes.

Implementing systemology isn't a one-off task but a cultural shift within an organization. It's a leader-driven mindset, enforced by operations managers and embraced by department heads. Over time, evolving and improving systems is essential. Click To Tweet

So, that’s a good segue to actually the death of a system. So let’s say we have a system which is the customer creation, I would call it. Let’s say with a digital agency, which you know better than most people on this call. So let’s say you want to create a customer. What would that system look like? Is it like five steps, 15 steps? And each of the steps, what would they look like? Is it under the step or is it video? How would you describe that?

This is probably the biggest difference between systemology and any other systems development or creation. Like if you think about process improvement methodology like Lean and Six Sigma, and they are process improvement, and it’s in the name. It’s you’re improving a process which pre-assumes that you have a process to improve. Systemology is about I don’t yet have any systems that I’ve properly documented or extracted, so let’s identify best practice.

So the first thing that you would do, let’s say we’re talking about creating customers, we think about what are you currently doing that is working for lead generation for that company. So there might be, oh, we’re already getting some referral business or we’re doing some social or AdWords or whatever it may be. We first identify what’s working and we capture that. So oftentimes it’ll start with a video first, just recording the task getting done. So we have two types of people in systems creation.

We call them knowledgeable workers and then we have a documenter. And we just record the knowledgeable worker doing their thing, the documenter watches the video and pulls out the key steps. Version one of that system might be a very simple checklist. And sometimes you might even need to apply the 80-20 to that system. So for example, let’s say social media was one of your channels for generating customer or getting awareness, you might go, ooh, okay, well, what is the 80-20 in there? Maybe it’s we post weekly posts on our Facebook page showcasing a customer client, like a customer case study and project that you’ve worked on.

So that is the piece that you identify, and then you just focus on creating the system around that. So, I mean, there’s a few considerations to make, but just you can get tremendous wins in a business through consistency and a lot of small to medium sized businesses lack consistency and if you can identify who currently does the task to the best possible standard, bottle that, bring everybody up to that standard and make it happen consistently, you would be surprised the amount of wins that a business can have. And that really becomes then your baseline. Later on in systemology, we talk about improving and creating systems from scratch.

Because once you get that first baseline down, if you’ve already got a little bit of traction, then it becomes easier to start to spot the holes. And you might go, once you’ve got a minimum viable set of systems together, you might go, oh, lead generation is still a problem. And then you have a look and you go, well, we only have two lead generation systems. And okay, well, maybe we need to look at adding another army. And that’s when you would bring in the consultant or this person who can solve just that piece.

I like that, so it’s kind of, it’s like a puzzle. And first you put in the corners of the puzzles and the major pieces. And then you see that there are some gaps and then it’s kind of easier to spot the gaps and the pieces that fit in. And then you just keep filling the picture and your business becomes bigger and more sophisticated as you’re filling out the project.

I’m going to lend to that if you don’t mind. That explains it to a T.

Awesome. That’s awesome. So let’s switch gears here. You talk about the four different stages of systemizing a business, and the top two stages are scalable and then saleable, or what I call buyable.

Yeah.

So, what is the difference between a scalable and a saleable system?

It’s scalable, which is that step before buyable, is where you’ve got your systems partially documented. Oftentimes it means you’ve only got some documentation in some departments. Some departments are a lot more developed than others. And so it varies from business to business. Sometimes the departments where the business owner is strongest are the ones that are undercooked because it’s relying heavily on them. But I’ve also seen the opposite. So it really does vary, but you’ve got a very clunky solution. You’re kind of cobbling things together. Some systems are stored on someone’s Dropbox.

Another one has it on their desktop. Someone has it in their head. It’s all over the place. But probably the biggest dead giveaway that you’re at that second, that scalable stage is that you constantly need to remind the team to follow process. And you have to go follow the system, follow the system. Are you following that process? When you compare that to the saleable stage where you’ve got complete documentation in all of the departments, the business runs a bit more like a Swiss watch. Again, the biggest telltale sign is that you reach a point where the team are saying, this is how we do things here. And it just becomes your way of doing things and it’s no longer a reminding thing.

You’ve built up enough of the habit that everybody, if they’ve got a question, they first go back to where the systems and the process are and the knowledge, and that’s the first place they consult. And it only gets escalated to the leadership team, department heads, business owners, if they’re unable to find that solution after that first port of call. So, it’s kind of the biggest difference. And you become… It’s like, saleable’s more… It’s the never-ending pursuit of excellence. Like, at that point in time, you get your baseline down, you’ve got your dashboard into place, you’re listening to the business, you’re getting pulled to areas that need attention, you’re pulling chunks of the system out, you’re reworking it and then inserting it back into the machine. That is that evolution piece that happens at that viable stage.

Is there a system for maintaining the systems? What I mean is that Gino Wickham talks about, he calls it the follow by all checklist, that every quarter or whatever frequency someone needs to train everyone and then measure and manage and update the system and then the cyclical thing happens. And that makes the systems go around and keep improving and becoming simpler.

I think probably where maybe our methodologies differ slightly between genomes and mine is really the stage in business. EOS and traction tends to work with businesses that end up being a little bit larger than systemology. Systemology captures them a little bit earlier in the process. So I’m really conscious of not overwhelming the business owner or feeling like we’re creating a whole bunch of extra work. So generally at the start, I just say two things need to happen. One is once we’ve got this minimum set of systems down, we create the dashboard and we listen to the business and we use, I mean, Gino talks about creating the issues list and having the discussion in that meeting where you address the issues list.

And it’s similar, like you think about that rather than thinking about it, or you always go back to an issue and think, how can we trace this back to the system level? And can we go to work at the system level? Which means you actually get led by what the business needs as opposed to, I’m just going back for reviewing sake. Because I saw this a lot with like companies that head down the ISO certification route where they’re required every year to have to get an auditor in to have a look. And they just, they’re building a culture of we’re just doing it to tick a box. We’re not doing it because we’re a systems driven business.

We’re doing it because we wanna get our accreditation so we can go for this big tender, but no one really looks at the systems anyway. So we’re better off adjusting and improving the systems as we go, in my opinion, as opposed to a very set interval. That might change, as I said, maybe as the organization grows, but I mean a sweet spot of between probably about five staff and 50 staff, I think a lot of businesses in that area have rubbish systems or they don’t have systems. And we try and think about how do we get something in place and then build a culture to constantly refer to it as opposed to being reminded on a set period.

That’s interesting. You know, I like to tell my clients when we talk about systems and how to implement it, that I used to work in a bank which had 3,000 employees and they had a 15-person systemization department. They call it organization department. What they did was they were constantly creating and updating systems. And the bank had 2,000 of these procedures.

Wow.

They were not like five, 10 pages. They were 50 to 70 pages with the flowcharts and the detailed descriptions. And it was a big thing and every one of this procedure had to be renewed every two years, which meant that, you know, 2000, basically, 20 had to do every, every, every week, 20 of these had to bring them in and the management, they burnt at least 30% of their time just poring over these procedures and rubber stamping them, but they never really read them.

And then they went back to the department, everyone put it back into the drawer for the next two years, and then people wouldn’t touch it for two years. It is a total nightmare. So I imagine that this is not a good system. On the other hand, when you never have this update built into it, then how do you know that the system is up to date? they learn it, they don’t need to refer to it, and then there are small changes, never get updated, and then a new person comes and the system’s out of date. How do you overcome that?

I think, as I said, different maybe size of organizations might have different needs. I think a big part of us, like we teach, is always having redundancy built in. So you need to have the primary person and a secondary person. So by training that way and any time every new team member comes through, that’s actually the perfect time to revisit. So whenever someone’s coming through for the first time learning something, generally speaking, that’s when we’re going back in and kind of tipping back in.

But, I mean, we say that as well, like we don’t require the team member to have the system open every single time that they execute it if they’ve done it hundreds of times and they’re following the process. It’s almost like they’ve internalized the process. We don’t require them to have it open. We know that can be a little bit sort of unrealistic. So we basically say, if you’re following the steps and you’re delivering the outcome, that’s okay.

But from a management perspective, like the operations manager, if someone’s making mistakes or missing steps, then they just kind of point them back to the system and say, hey, you need to follow that process because clearly you haven’t got it yet. So it’s always the system’s fault and the system’s problem and we blame the system first. If the team member hasn’t followed the process, then that’s a different discussion. But it’s always the system’s fault first if something hasn’t delivered the outcome that’s desired.

So what is the best practice in using documented systems?

Probably the biggest one is there needs to be a clear link between the documented system and when the task is assigned. So I know now that we kind of all move online these days, a lot of people, a lot of companies are using project management tools and I feel like that is infinitely more scalable and manageable than trying to run it out of email. You can’t really be assigning tasks and projects out of email. We need a central location where clients are getting inputted and specific milestones that need to be covered in there, and then they can be assigned out to the team members that are going to get executed on it.

And the secret is to make sure the point at which the task is assigned inside the description has a link to the system that explains what needs to be done. So that way, effectively, when the team member ticks it off as complete, they’re effectively saying, I’ve followed it to the standard outlined in the system, because there’s no confusion on what needs to be done, because there’s a link right there telling you how to do it. And that is a great then way for managing, because the person’s checked it off, if they haven’t done it to standard, you can go, well, you’ve ticked it off, but the system’s here and you haven’t quite followed the process, so don’t be ticking it off until you’re following the process to appropriate standard.

So that’s kind of where you want to get to. It doesn’t happen straight away because we need to kind of build out some of these systems and processes, but identifying key pieces and documenting those and having some video training. And I always, the way I think about systems, like this comes from Michael Gerber, I had the good fortune to do some work with Michael, and he always talked about this idea of your business as a school. And that’s really what we’re doing. We’re taking your team, which are the students, and we’re taking them from unproductive, inefficient team members and thinking how do we make them as productive in the shortest possible time as possible.

I think the system basically gives someone 80% of the solution and they might then work with their supervisor. So if you’re a new team member, you’re learning something, you follow the system, you learn the system, and then when you meet with the knowledgeable worker or your supervisor who’s going to show you how to do it, you’ve already got 80% of the knowledge, which means that senior team member needs to spend a lot less to get you to where you need to be and then you make adjustments. So it’s not like once you get a system, you operate in a silo and you now no longer talk to anyone.

And similarly, any time that there are exceptions and we teach don’t create a system that covers every single scenario and option. Create and capture the path that is most probable and then let the senior team members or the experienced ones handle the exceptions. And then you let your juniors and people getting started handle those vanilla cases. And that’s another big sort of piece for the way that we think about it. And it’s all about simplification. Because that then makes the system infinitely less overwhelming, and something that you can capture now, because we’re just capturing a most probable scenario.

Don't create a system that covers every single scenario and option. Create and capture the path that is most probable and then let the senior team members or the experienced ones handle the exceptions. Click To Tweet

I love this project management, the idea that you’re managing the project and it’s embedded in that project management are the resources, the system that can be pulled on through that link, whatever it is. variations. And then you get overwhelmed and the updating and everything. So just focus on the most probable path. Just give people an idea how you’re going to get there. And then just simplify the whole thing. So I really wonder. And because I use the audio book. I don’t have, even though I said I did but I couldn’t find it. I could find the, the, the soft cover, which I thought I had both, but I haven’t. So I didn’t have the chance to look at the resources that you put on. So what kind of resources did you consult in developing systemology? Can you give me some examples of what you used as inputs other than your own experience?

By design, and I think this is what makes systemology quite unique, I didn’t want to consult any of the work around process improvement and stuff done before. So I’m not a black belt in Six Sigma. I’ve not studied Lean, other than a little bit of anecdotal and talking with clients and seeing some failed attempts at ISO. I’m not like some ISO accredited person. A lot of it was through the trial and error, looking at startup culture and teams like that, but I’ve not had any formal training around the systems side of things.

And I think that’s what enabled me to approach it with just fresh eyes and go, maybe I’m solving a different problem, which is actually the problem that happens beforehand, which is I don’t have any systems, and it’s that first step from zero to one, as opposed to zero to 100. So, other than, I mean, some of the books, like I’ve read a lot of the classics, like you mentioned e-myth and traction and scaling up and like, yeah, the goal, I read a little bit about that. Yeah, that’s a good one. Yeah, so that’s that whole idea of a critical path. So, yeah, there wasn’t any particular text where I was like, ooh, this has played a big part, other than I suppose traction.

And what I took from traction was more this idea of how do we turn this into a system and the approach. Like, there was no system for systemising a business, which sounds ridiculous because, I mean, it’s a system. It’s in the name. We’re talking about systems, yet all of the books that I’ve read didn’t really feel like a system. And then, again, that’s what I felt Gino did with a lot of Vern’s work, was pull it into a step one, step two, step three, step four, which then made it quite consumable for someone if they just didn’t know where to go next.

That’s awesome, so our time is kind of coming to an end here, but before we go, can you share with our listeners if they would like to get the TC into, obviously they can buy Systemology on Amazon, but there are also systemologists, people who are implementing this stuff. So can you tell a few words about what are the different ways of kind of consuming the systemology process and what can business owners do? What are the options available to them?

Yes, so at systemology.com, there’s a link to a lot of those things, like you mentioned, Amazon and Audible’s another great one. You mentioned you listened to the audio book and Michael Gerber actually read the forward to the book so that’s a nice little one if you’re an audio listener. And then if you want to go that little bit step further like I always say the book is useful and complete I actually don’t think you need to for some people the book is more than enough to get you where you need to but if you do need a little bit more hand after that we just we have these three levels it’s like a do-it-yourself online program, which goes a little bit deeper than what’s in the book.

Usually we run quarterly group programs where we kind of work together between, about 15 to 20 of us will go through over the course of six months, and we apply systemology in the business as a group. And then the last option is like a done-for-you service. And we actually certify people in systemology. So we work with a lot of business coaches, consultants, accountants, exit planners, and we teach them systemology and then they have become part of our certified network of partners and we can connect business owners with them and they will work a bit more one-on-one.

They’ll literally do the extractions. They’ll identify the top systems, I’ll meet with the team and do the documentation, a lot of the heavy lifting for you. So there’s like a few different options depending on what you’re after. But again, I always say books are the best place to start. The book is very useful and very complete. And then only if you feel you need something extra, then you can reach out, but the book might be enough to get started.

I can testify to that. The group is very digestible. It’s actually entertaining I listened to listen to you explaining things with your Australian accent, which was which is fun to listen to and it’s over complicated. So this is this is wonderful that you kind of digested everything into a easy, easily consumed version of it so so congratulations. And I think we have a very easy easily consumed version of it so so congratulations. So definitely a listeners, please. You don’t miss it, read the book this is the book, check it out and.

And then obviously if you want to take it a step further there are systemologists that they can help you hands on. we normally do, but you are the author of one of these managing blueprints. So we got the information straight from the horse’s mouth. So thank you for coming on the show. And and for those of you listeners, if you enjoyed it, please don’t forget to rate and review the podcast, to subscribe to YouTube and stay tuned, because next week we’ll have another entrepreneur sharing their blueprint with us.

Fantastic. Thanks for having me, Steve.

 

Important Links:

This entry was posted in . Bookmark the permalink.